Curse

william1975 · Aug 30, 2007, 07:40 PM // 19:40

The op isn't writing this because this is the way he writes he is doing it because he wants to, and I certainly don't speak like that in spoken conversation, like the OP suggests most people do. I prefer to be understood in both my written and sopken communication. While he is quite right that he has the right to speak and write any way he so desires, that doesn not mean he shoudl expecte to be taken seriously or even understood.

I don't inderstand leet or shorthand slang, or whatever thsi is supposed to be.

I have, however, noticed that in the rules of conduct on this site a part covers posting threads and posts in a proper manner using the correct language and not abreviations, that some of us don't understand.

While some of our non english speaking participants may not be able to always form perfect sentences, native english speakers should have no trouble whatsoever.

The post is a disgrace on a forum that should be easily understood by all coming to it. There is no excuse for writing in this manner. zwei2stein is quite right this kind of post should be removed, and I think banning the person while it could seem harsh would be appropriate

Noa Lutra · Aug 30, 2007, 07:42 PM // 19:42

/notsigned,

...and the bad spelling made my eyes bleed!! True story!

Vermilion Okeanos · Aug 30, 2007, 07:50 PM // 19:50

I tried to read it out of respect. But it filled me with frustration just trying to read it. It disturb me just trying to read it; not going to read that crap any more.

HawkofStorms · Aug 30, 2007, 07:57 PM // 19:57

You are breaking forum rules by talking in "slang." Forums are not chat rooms. You are supposed to use proper English. Don't abbriavate words in internet slang just to "look cool." Don't argue about it. It is against the rules. Period.

gabrial heart · Aug 30, 2007, 08:30 PM // 20:30

For me it's not even the shorthand or the really horrible grammar, it's that doesn't even addressing the complaints correctly.

Account based HOM isn't what a good majority are asking for, it's account based customization of the mini's that people would certainly like much better. If i'd like to send my fungal wallow or my 3 headed chicken, and so on... out with any character on my account, i can't if i stick them in a hall. Even if they stick an npc in there like the festival hat maker to dupe your minis, i'd be fine with that.

I agree that *PVP only* folks should get to use the hall, currently they cannot and because it's character based and not account based i don't think they ever would unless it's changed. Which makes it even more silly to have high level pvp titles in a pve monument.

The valor monument should include unique weapons and off-hands, I'm really imagining the *greens* only. Personally, i don't care to keep track of every gold i pick up anyway, even if it's a limited dropped skin. I'm pretty sure it's that way now, but only for those *skins* that drop in GW:EN.

On the side note about the OP and spelling/grammar...

I don't mind shorthand, even for forum posts, but "teh" isn't shorthand or l88t and chopping one letter off a 2 letter word isn't shorthand either... It's just plain lazy. Not to mention that it's clear you do know how to spell and formulate sentences correctly, why not add the "t" to just, is it really saving you time?

It's pretty much expected that people will have errors in forum posts, but just like most responders mentioned... 99% of this post is just trolling for an audience.

WetWookie · Aug 30, 2007, 08:52 PM // 20:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by snaek

BLAAaaAARGG!

Hold on guys.... I think it's trying to communicate!

Silly Warrior · Aug 30, 2007, 09:19 PM // 21:19

yo you guyz i means i mean the best for the ahallz of mounments i jus wanna get every1 to be happy wit it u knoe? i meanis i made teh petitions bedcausse I wanted to ell guild wars that we mean business
--------------------

Seriously? The current petition includes the option of no changes, (which only 2% or so of the community voted for).

Having an Anti-Petition is silly because the petition that is currently up has the option of voting against changes. Except I'm assuming by the way you type you wouldn't understand that?

Only 2% of the entire community (less than 2%) voted for no changes at all. That means only 2% of this forum would agree with this thread.

CA CA CA CA CA CA CA CLOSED!

Thank you very much, ladies and gents.